Hello.

Please note that this topic is not about starting a flame war. I know there are a lot of people on the internet giving away magic tricks and that a lot of magicians hate them for this.
I am learning about magic since I was a little boy many years ago. I was allowed to visit a birthday of a friend of my parents and there was a magician (non stage, he was just a guest) showing some tricks. After I convinced him that I wanted to learn and not just knowing how the trick is done he revealed one for me. He even gave me his gimmick. This encouraged me to perform magic as well. On the other hand there are so many magicians who seem to never give away any of their secrets or if they do, they sell it. Sometimes at very high prices. This is why the question came up to me. I am no great magician. I am content with the little street magic I do and so I never really thought about that for a long time. But now I would like to hear the opinion of the community.

The question is: What do you think about this matter? Would open-source or -access help or hurt? In which way? And why do you think so?

Can it get any more open?

Salieri, if you don't mind the question, how old are you?

Magic is pretty much open source excepting what some folks are using in performance today, some legacy works which are awaiting publication (Hofzinser's work being an example and Germain's work being another) and items which seem useful to keep as mysteries among magicians like the Hooker Card Act. Interesting name - there was a guy back in Mozart's time...

@silvercup: Don't get me wrong. I am not talking about bad "tutorials" on youtube. I am talking about giving free access to the trick by the inventor instead of selling it for sometimes unreasonable prices. What would be the advantages and disadvantages of this.

@tomsk192: 26. I was pretty young when Linux was put under free license, but you may say I kind of "grew up" with it and with the idea, that free software can yield some great results. And I am unsure if this applies to magic. Why do you ask?

@Jonathan: So? It seems to me that little is more closed than magic. Of course there may be a lot of techniques revealed by now. But that is not the same as open source or open access.

Saliera,

Full time magicians make a living by keeping their techniques to themselves. When they make a decision. To sell their ideas (or someone else's) they are making a trade off between generating revenue by performing versus selling their performance.

I doubt 'the greater good' comes into play. Rather, 'maximizing my own profits'.

If you want to learn the secrets of magic, it just takes a little research.

Hudson

I wasn't sure where the question was coming from, and I'm still not quite sure. Magic is incredibly available, some of it legitimately out of copyright and available for free. Then there is the option to invent and build magic yourself. (Who knew?) Or to save up and buy other people's creations. But at the heart of it is why? Magic technique, or 'secrets' are there for the asking. If you can be bothered to look then you will find. If you don't find, then probably find another interest, as magic requires the bare minimum of brains. Should it be more free? Should we advertise, "Free magic secrets, free exposure, get your free magic info here!"? I think it's a bit sad, but look how many people do it. But that isn't germane to this point, that is about the neediness of those individuals.

You nailed it spot-on. If you read some of my posts advocating against the mass commercialization of effects, you'll know what I do for a living right quick.

Please you're getting me all wrong. neither I'm judging, nor I am saying "that's the way to go, do it, because it's better!" This is a purely hypothetical question. Please stop referring to me, since I didn't said anything about my opinion so far. And the thing is: I need input to come up with an opinion, because I have no true opinion about this so far.

@Hudson: I realize that. And it is indeed a critical point to be included in the discussion. Would a magician lose a lot of income if the techniques and secrets were available for free? I do not have a final answer so I can only suspect. I think people would still join classes or buy a high quality DVD. Just because there would be more value in getting the information this way. But magicians who don't intend to use the trick might just use the information they could get for free in order to research even newer tricks or techniques. They would not be forced to research again what already was researched. Don't you think?

@tomsk: That's pretty much the opposite of what I am talking about. I was talking about sharing knowledge. Not advertising free exposure. Research is all fine and exactly the matter of interest here. Would there be a great benefit in sharing the knowledge?

@Phoenix: Could you provide any links please?

Salieri,

Please don't take my comments as critical toward you. You asked the question; a question that I find very interesting.

My background might help here - I've been a business person for a number of years, after which I shifted my primary focus to magic. (www.hudsonmagic.com).

The magic environment is very unusual as a business model/industry. How many industries range from amateur to high-end professional? Think lemonade stand to Snapple - and throw in grandma! Except the local lemonade stand gives away the recipe for Snapple and tells you how to make it at home. The Snapple guys aren't very happy. It doesn't matter of they can't quantify how much revenue is lost - it becomes the principle.

Now I've found the magic community to be very open - in certain ways. When I lived in Omaha, there was a lot of one-on-one sharing. Because there was trust. A small market, all of the active magicians knew each other and would not step on each other. The SAM club is small, shares show leads in member-wide emails, and freely shares ideas.

In the broader magic world, everyone doesn't know everyone else. If I show a trick and then next week you(or anyone else) shows the same trick and hears the dreaded, "I've seen that before" or "I know how that's done". Why should I care? I don't know you.

Probably enough rambling there. This is a very interesting industry - kind of wish it was a case study when I was in business school so many years ago. Perhaps the beer industry would be a better example than lemonade ... And how has that worked out for the 'big guys'?

Hudson

In my experience it's been open source data, if not text/image for copyright reasons, (okay you have to buy a copy of the book sometimes) and open access (anyone can buy a copy of the book) and for the most part the information have been free for the asking.

What have you not been able to access?

@Hudson: Thank you, I was (and still am) worried that the topic might was mistaken, leading to me-against-everyone and vice versa.

I fear I don't get your point. If I would discover the secret recipe of Snapple, then what? What is the worst what could happen if it gets public? People who like Snapple would still buy it. People who are too lazy to make their own or are not able to keep a large Stock of it would also continue to buy it. Fanboys of the brand would continue to buy it. I suspect there would be a fairly small number of people who would make their own. The only thing what would really hurt the company would be competition. But in case of the fee market, competition is awesome. And I am pretty sure that Dr Pepper Snapple is big enough to compensate any kind of competition. A magician might not. So the example is probably not that good. But what would happen? Do you think if a plain information is for free, the market for high quality teaching DVDs or something like this would stop to exist?

@Jonathan: Are you sure you know what open source and open access means? If something is available to buy on a market, it's the essence of capitalism. As soon as you have to buy something it is neither open access, nor open source. Both, open access and open source means, that it is put under free license. Available for anyone without a charge.
How much you are able to learn in the capitalistic world comes down to how much money you have. Do you think this is a fair principle? Do you think science can grow well with this principle?
And a lot of things are not even "free for the asking", because of copyright. Personally I would be afraid to ask in the first place. In public at least.

@Salieri: What specifically have you not been able to access as far as magic data?

There's also the notion of "need to know" - and audiences don't need to know the engineering behind a trick they are watching or have the script for a play (complete with lighting cues and realtime backstage view of the cast) during a performance.

What would you like? And how do you imagine it working? Since we're talking about 'secrets' - here's someone else's take on that topic: http://numerocinqmagazine.com/2013/11/03......axelrod/


Ubuntu phones are about to hit the market and some of us do read Cory Doctorow and know about copyleft, the creative commons...

So where's the beef about magic? Did you miss the thread about "ultimate magician" and it's contents? Do you need to know what's behind the backdrop of the Hooker Card Rise setup?

Other than annoying the magic shop product economy - what do you see happening with open access / open source to magic data? Dadist reconstructions of magic texts? Mertz collages of props and instructions that move to perform other tricks? How about a backdrop using the text of the source material used for the tricks in a show plus the script of the show?

Open Access: http://guides.lib.umich.edu/openaccess

Open Source: http://opensource.org/osd

Salieri, I am sorry for getting it arse about t1t.

You are talking about coding?! Wow!

What Jonathan said.

@Jonathan: This Thread is not about me. It was meant to be a general discussion. I don't know what would happen, this is why this thread exist. Why do you asking me all the things I'd like to know from the community?

I don't understand your question. Kindly state your case. What about the magic community (beyond the works which some are actively selling in the tiny market of "the magic shop") have you found less than open access/open source?

Others have responded that for most purposes the magic community data is open source/open access. Look at the circumstances which permitted the "Fooling Houdini" book. From what I've seen magic is pretty much open source and open access. Especially now with the internet. There are some books from the turn of last century that lay bare much of what was known and in use at the time and published for the open book market. The books are out of copyright and so it's no surprise to find them on the internet. If it's in print (published by the inventor/writer) then the student is expected to absorb and refine what they can from the item and make their own works to perform as they see fit (for lay audiences). If a work merits offering to the community it gets offered onto the market. Within days that material is often circulated as gossip so the "data" is often available in what amounts to open source.

Is this about the market that needs money to keep open magic shops and keep the manufacturer's busy? That's more part of the business than the craft. Most I've met in the craft are pretty open about their work, what they know and referring serious students to those who are experts in fields.

So what do you believe makes your question relevant? Be specific. And if you really want an info on the Hooker Card Act item - ask the folks who are its custodians. They have performed the thing recently.

Alright. We misunderstood each other, I suppose.
Let me point out first, that I do not consider public domain as os/oa. I should have pointed sthis out earlier, I'm sorry. So they do not apply in the current situation. If we take a look at the past where book x was not yet public domain we could argue about that in the very same fashion as we now can argue about why a new book or DVD is not free.
What I meant originally was, that a lot of magicians seem to be very "closed source". I think you can overdo the whole "never reveal your secrets" thing. If I - for example - read here about any gimmick, I have the feeling, that there can't be a good discussion about it, because noone wants to give away the secret (and it is not even allowed by the rules of this forum). I think this is very stupid, because this way ideas can't spread. Imagine I'd have an awesome idea to make trick y (which is currently for sale and copyright-protected) way better, I could not share the idea. I inevitably had to reveal the originals secret, so I am not permitted to share my idea. (Keep in mind, that this is only an hypothetical example.)
Another example: There are a lot tricks out there specifically designed to work with a dollar bill. Anyone who will transfer the effect to another bill would not be able to a) get free access to the secret and b) would not even be able to share his results. So, a results in: the person has or either give it up, recreate the effect (which consumes unnecessary research ressources) or has to bite the bullet and buy the effect, if there is no way to make it possible with another type of bill, the money was spend for needlessly. And b obviously means the person can't ask around in forums or share ideas in public.

So there are two examples. I could give you a lot more "facepalm moments" were I thought that people overdo the whole thing, but I am not allowed to describe them, because I would reveal secrets. xD


How do you make someone believe, that you are serious using the inernet? That's quite a task. And it also does not solve the problems mentioned above.

It seems that your definition of Open Source requires sharing of secrets on the internet and that meeting in magic clubs, both formal and informal, do not qualify as Open Source.

The later certainly happens, as Johnathan has stated. The former happens under certain circumstances. For example, once you have 50 posts on the Magic Café additional sections become available where secrets are shared.

Remember that effective magic entertainment almost always requires that the spectator does not know how the effect is accomplished. With the ease of internet search, there needs to be some limitations on access to prevent the casual observer from learning the how in a 2 minute search.

Hudson

It seems that your definition of Open Source requires sharing of secrets on the internet and that meeting in magic clubs, both formal and informal, do not qualify as Open Source.

The later certainly happens, as Johnathan has stated. The former happens under certain circumstances. For example, once you have 50 posts on the Magic Café additional sections become available where secrets are shared.

Remember that effective magic entertainment almost always requires that the spectator does not know how the effect is accomplished. With the ease of internet search, there needs to be some limitations on access to prevent the casual observer from learning the how in a 2 minute search.

Hudson

My definition of Open Source requires using everything we have. We could still place people on the markets to herald the news of course, but we don't do that anymore because the internet is far more effective. And indeed the internet is made for sharing information. It could provide a huge research boost, couldn't it?

Does a bit of money or do 50 posts provide a decent amount of protection? And why do you think so?
Also searching for the secrets would destroy the personal experience of magic. Maybe I'm far too idealistic, but I wouldn't do that, except I'd want to perform it by myself.